With Critical Reasoning, you can dispute conclusions and you can dispute the way that facts are connected to arrive at the conclusion, but you can't dispute anything that's given as a fact. So here since the pharma rep is using "all medicines have side effects" as a fact, that's just not disputable.
What you can argue with here, though, is the fact that the doctor's concerns are very specific side effects (night sweats, loss of appetite) and the pharma rep only mentions side effects
...
What you can argue with here, though, is the fact that the doctor's concerns are very specific side effects (night sweats, loss of appetite) and the pharma rep only mentions side effects
...
![FLO – Therapy at the Club – Pre-Single [iTunes Plus M4A]](http://is1-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Music221/v4/a4/11/88/a41188ed-0f2e-e8d5-1163-d59e373cc58c/26UMGIM30046.rgb.jpg/208x208bb.webp)
